I got a new set of somewhat cheap bluetooth earbuds. If I am watching a show on my phone and using them, there is a noticeable lag between the audio and video. Is this something I have any control over? Is it a function of the cheap-ish earbuds? Is it a problem with the phone? My google'ing isn't much help. Lots of talk about Android's "slow" audio stack but no real solutions.
It's probably down to the earbuds, more expensive ones support lower latency codecs like aptx that drastically reduce the delay. If you're playing local files VLC lets you adjust the audio delay to sync it up, and can even remember it and autoset it whenever your earbuds are connected, for streaming like netflix you're kinda SOL though
I got a new set of somewhat cheap bluetooth earbuds. If I am watching a show on my phone and using them, there is a noticeable lag between the audio and video. Is this something I have any control over? Is it a function of the cheap-ish earbuds? Is it a problem with the phone? My google'ing isn't much help. Lots of talk about Android's "slow" audio stack but no real solutions.
It's probably down to the earbuds, more expensive ones support lower latency codecs like aptx that drastically reduce the delay. If you're playing local files VLC lets you adjust the audio delay to sync it up, and can even remember it and autoset it whenever your earbuds are connected, for streaming like netflix you're kinda SOL though
Is there any way to tell from the amazon page (https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B07MQ1FVBV/) if they support the lower latency codecs? All I see is that they are bluetooth 5 but I didn't even know that was a thing.
Call me crazy, but CA$70 doesn't strike me as all that cheap (although it's obviously not top-end pricing). Certainly AptX shouldn't be too much to ask for for that much.
Call me crazy, but CA$70 doesn't strike me as all that cheap (although it's obviously not top-end pricing). Certainly AptX shouldn't be too much to ask for for that much.
Earbuds at the prosumer level are in the mid hundreds.
Bluetooth earbuds under $100US are considered budget models.
Call me crazy, but CA$70 doesn't strike me as all that cheap (although it's obviously not top-end pricing). Certainly AptX shouldn't be too much to ask for for that much.
Earbuds at the prosumer level are in the mid hundreds.
Bluetooth earbuds under $100US are considered budget models.
I picked up some IEMs (KZ ZSTs) for £15 a while back and later added their Bluetooth module for £12. Water resistant, AptX and excellent battery life, and sound worthy of something far, far more expensive.
Granted I still use my wired buds more often (on a V30, why wouldn't you), but having the option is sometimes useful.
I got a new set of somewhat cheap bluetooth earbuds. If I am watching a show on my phone and using them, there is a noticeable lag between the audio and video. Is this something I have any control over? Is it a function of the cheap-ish earbuds? Is it a problem with the phone? My google'ing isn't much help. Lots of talk about Android's "slow" audio stack but no real solutions.
it's likely the fact that the earbuds are cheap. some audio codecs are lower latency than others and the ones that are low latency tend to not be present on cheap products.
I'd try them with a different BT device to confirm that's the issue before getting a new pair; I bought a midrange BT speaker for my bedroom a while back and it worked just fine and dandy with both my Nexus 5 and other devices I connected to it.
Upgraded the phone to a Nexus 6P and it's complete garbage with it. The volume control is completely out of whack (it goes Silent, Quiet, Noisy, 15 more level of Too Loud), random static burst while music is playing, it'll randomly lose connection and I need to turn the devices on in a very set order, otherwise it doesn't see the speaker until I manually search for nearby BT devices.
I keep my old Nexus 5 in the bedroom as an alarm clock, just so I can still use it to listen to music down there.
Call me crazy, but CA$70 doesn't strike me as all that cheap (although it's obviously not top-end pricing). Certainly AptX shouldn't be too much to ask for for that much.
$70 CAD is definitely in the budget side of bluetooth headphones. I own two sets and both cost at least $200.
You can probably find good/decent ones in the $150 range.
As is the case with a lot of products, if you look through a list of all products in a category the cheapest ones are probably the cheapest for a reason. Will they get the job done? probably. Will they be good? Probably not. If you used those headphones just for music you'd never notice an issue.
Call me crazy, but CA$70 doesn't strike me as all that cheap (although it's obviously not top-end pricing). Certainly AptX shouldn't be too much to ask for for that much.
$70 CAD is definitely in the budget side of bluetooth headphones. I own two sets and both cost at least $200.
You can probably find good/decent ones in the $150 range.
As is the case with a lot of products, if you look through a list of all products in a category the cheapest ones are probably the cheapest for a reason. Will they get the job done? probably. Will they be good? Probably not. If you used those headphones just for music you'd never notice an issue.
Yes they are fine for music or podcasts. I wouldn't say these are the cheapest but definitely on the budget end. Time to decide if I want to return them or keep them.
So, what are good $100+ Bluetooth headphones? I have the RHA MA650 right now, and they're fine, but the little microphone doodad hanging off the wire on the right side is constantly getting caught on my shirt/jacket collars and getting dislodged from my ear. It's very frustrating. Also, while they can connect to two devices (good because I can use them with my phone and my Switch-with-Bluetooth-dongle), whenever they disconnects from a device (like when I turn off my Switch), an automated voice starts saying "Disconnected" in my ear every couple of seconds, forever, until I restart the headphones. As you can imagine, that gets in the way of listening to podcasts.
I spent the last couple of days trying to decide on which replacement headphones to get, but it seems like everything has some downside. Either headphones don't have aptX, or they don't use USB-C (micro-USB is I guess OK, if everything else is good, but proprietary chargers are not something I'm interested in), or they're not water-resistant, or whatever.
I'm not really interested in the wire-free earbuds, AirPods-style, but I even considered just taking the leap and getting the Powerbeats Pro, since they seem to be getting a ton of positive press; unfortunately, turns out they use the Apple Lightning adapter, and that falls under non-standard proprietary adapter in my eyes.
USB-C is really hard to find on bluetooth earbuds. on over hear headphones it's easier to find, but not as common as it should be, but USB-C earbuds are not super common.
The earbuds I use myself are Samsung Galaxy Buds, which are truly wireless and $200CAD retail. I got them on a sale for $160 a while back.
Just replaced the battery in my Samsung gear S2 watch. It has been needing it for a while honestly, but it finally died so I did it. It wasn't terribly hard but I am pretty happy I managed to do it. Should let me get another few years out of this thing.
I just can't help but feel like totally wireless earbuds would constantly pop out of my ears and clatter to the floor. Probably irrational.
While this is only re: Airpods, which you're not into, I can safely say that those little bastards are the least-unstable earbuds I've ever worn. It's insane, they just stay in unless poked, brushed, etc. Running, any motion, no problem at all.
So while every ear is different, you might be pleasantly surprised! I've also heard good things about some of the wireless Beats line.
During this round of research, I have been thinking "well... alright, maybe I'll try some true wireless buds". It's good to hear that at least some of them are very stable.
Although, it does mean shorter battery life, some sacrifices in audio quality, and touch controls (rather than physical buttons), right? Which true wireless earbuds would you folks recommend?
yeah, I mean, it's not like the wires attached to headphones actually do a whole bunch to keep them in your ears. It's all about the fit.
Every headphone is different, every ear is different. Airpods either fit or they don't. I had the Samsung Gear IconX but I had to return them becuase they wouldn't stay in my ear properly, but the Galaxy buds do. A friend of mine is the exact opposite.
It just comes to fit. I don't have any that I currently use but I've always found bose earbuds fit my ears perfectly. I had a set of their noise cancelling earbuds (QC 20) that I could literally wear 24/7 and not get uncomfortable.
Personally I love the truly wireless earbuds but I don't find them 100% essential. the reason I got the Galaxy buds was because they're one of the few bluetooth headphones I could find at the time that charge via USB C (or qi). IF there had been a good set of headphones with a wire between them that had a USB-C port I might have gotten that and probably would have been just as happy.
I really like my Jabra Elite Active 65t's. Sound is good, fit is good, battery is good. I went with the actives to get the water resistance rating for the gym. My other choice were the Galaxy Buds, but I got the Jabra on sale.
every ear is shaped differently, but especially mine, so "these fit me perfectly" hasn't ever been a very helpful recommendation to me. I gave up and just resigned myself to using circumaural headphones because earbuds never fucking stay in.
+2
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
The only ear buds that ever fit my ears perfectly are the ones that came with the iPhone 4s. I was sad when they broke.
Also a note re battery, while yes, the buds themselves have a lower battery life per charge (5hrs of music for AirPods etc), the case is where most of the juice lives, and that's good for like a week of regular use, assuming you stick them back in when you aren't using them. Seeing a lot of wireless buds do this now, and it works out pretty well from my experience. (I am never using my pods 5 hours straight, for instance, and they charge up REAL quick in the case.)
0
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
For some reason none of Nintendo's online-only games/apps will work on my home wi-fi, only on 4G. It's bizarre and I have no idea why.
(I'm on Android 9, Motorola Moto G6.)
Also Twitter and Paypal have the same problem, yet notifications for those apps still appear fine? They just time out connecting.
For some reason none of Nintendo's online-only games/apps will work on my home wi-fi, only on 4G. It's bizarre and I have no idea why.
(I'm on Android 9, Motorola Moto G6.)
Also Twitter and Paypal have the same problem, yet notifications for those apps still appear fine? They just time out connecting.
For some reason none of Nintendo's online-only games/apps will work on my home wi-fi, only on 4G. It's bizarre and I have no idea why.
(I'm on Android 9, Motorola Moto G6.)
Also Twitter and Paypal have the same problem, yet notifications for those apps still appear fine? They just time out connecting.
I haven't tried the airpods, but every other headphone shape that apple came out was like jamming broken glass in my ears
You should skip 'em then. They're the same shape as all the other ones (post-perfectly-round) pretty much. Beats may be okay if you ever go looking, and maybe like, the rumored noise-canceling Pods they're working on, but yeah, they've got a shape, and they're sticking with it.
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
For some reason none of Nintendo's online-only games/apps will work on my home wi-fi, only on 4G. It's bizarre and I have no idea why.
(I'm on Android 9, Motorola Moto G6.)
Also Twitter and Paypal have the same problem, yet notifications for those apps still appear fine? They just time out connecting.
Any chance you're familiar with the interface enough to log in and change your DNS server? 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 are Google DNS and that might sidestep your problem.
Edit: otherwise see if someone will let you borrow a router and see if it works.
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
I'm actually already using a DNS proxy server that fetches from Google DNS by default.
I tried disabling that and just setting up Google DNS on the router... no difference.
I don't know anyone who would be willing to lend me another router to test, sadly.
Everything worked fine with version of Android that my previous phone shipped with (I forget which now, maybe 7.1?) so I don't think it's the router? I really am baffled.
Why would notifications be getting through without the apps themselves being able to reach their requisite servers? I can tap on a Twitter notification but the Twitter app then fails to load that tweet.
Also videos/GIF's from cached tweets still play/animate, so at least part of twitter's CDN must still be reachable?
So Google did its launch announcement of the Pixel 4, while im not a fan of the Pixel series for a multitude of reasons I can appreciate them usually being best in class for photography.
When the 4 was shown off I seriously thought it was a bad joke.
So Google did its launch announcement of the Pixel 4, while im not a fan of the Pixel series for a multitude of reasons I can appreciate them usually being best in class for photography.
When the 4 was shown off I seriously thought it was a bad joke.
Was it just because its just a fancy camera and nothing really else compared to other phones in the same price point in the market, or something specific?
For a couple of years now I've been of the opinion that google is just another android OEM, who makes one of many implementations of android, and is not the best at making either hardware or software.
Their cameras are great, but the phones are.... not good. They've been plagued by reliability issues. the 2XL had a crap screen. the USB-C ports on the 2 and 3 series wore out, the 3 has a calling issue that was never fixed, etc. The battery life is subpar compared to other phones, especially on the smaller non XL phone. And seriously, the Pixel 4 having a 90hz refresh display and a 2800mah battery is a recipe for disaster.
On the software side, Google's android skin is clean but barebones, other OEMs do better things. Google also has a bad record for buggy version updates. They're not the only OEM to have buggy version updates, but considering they run the Android project, I would expect better. Some people like the Google skin of android, and that's great for them. I don't mind it at all either, there are just better implementations of the platform out there, in my opinion.
The only thing google does better than anyone else is software updates. Security updates are out at the beginning of every month, and version updates come day of. the only other OEM who manages that is Essential, and they don't really count.
This is 100% my own personal opinion, but as android updates have gotten more iterative and less significant from year to year, I'm becoming more and more ok waiting a couple months before a major version update gets pushed to my phone, especially if that means it's thoroughly tested. Would I like it faster, sure. Do I have to have the latest update the day it releases? It would be nice but I can live without. I've been playing with Android 10 on my Essential Phone and it's honestly not that much different than 9.
Basically, I think the only reason anyone should buy a pixel is if you absolutely have to have the best possible camera you can buy in a phone. Otherwise, there are better options, cheaper options, and better options that are also cheaper.
Zxerolfor the smaller pieces, my shovel wouldn't doso i took off my boot and used my shoeRegistered Userregular
I expected them to put more emphasis on Soli, since that is the one fresh and new thing it has against everyone else and has the potential to shape the paradigm on how we interact with our devices, but no, it was literally a few minutes of blurb while the rest of the time was spent on the usual photography stuff. And from the initial hands-on with it (not particularly impressive or robust, especially compared to earlier concepts), I suppose it's not a surprise.
That's to add a bunch of other bonkers downtrends, e.g. smaller battery than the P3 for the non-XL version, no more unlimited storage for original quality photos... also, still only offering 64 or 128gb of storage for a flagship in two thousand and nineteen is utterly hilarious. Yeah, I know that doesn't matter for probably most people, and Google's whole thing is to store everything online (see the original photos quality caveat above, though), but come the fuck on.
I expected them to put more emphasis on Soli, since that is the one fresh and new thing it has against everyone else and has the potential to shape the paradigm on how we interact with our devices, but no, it was literally a few minutes of blurb while the rest of the time was spent on the usual photography stuff. And from the initial hands-on with it (not particularly impressive or robust, especially compared to earlier concepts), I suppose it's not a surprise.
That's to add a bunch of other bonkers downtrends, e.g. smaller battery than the P3 for the non-XL version, no more unlimited storage for original quality photos... also, still only offering 64 or 128gb of storage for a flagship in two thousand and nineteen is utterly hilarious. Yeah, I know that doesn't matter for probably most people, and Google's whole thing is to store everything online (see the original photos quality caveat above, though), but come the fuck on.
faaaaaaarp
on soli specifically, a couple of the first hands on things I've read/watched said that it's not some super magical thing. Granted, early impressions, but I wonder if it wasn't really talked up a whole bunch because it's not actually really a big thing?
I expected them to put more emphasis on Soli, since that is the one fresh and new thing it has against everyone else and has the potential to shape the paradigm on how we interact with our devices, but no, it was literally a few minutes of blurb while the rest of the time was spent on the usual photography stuff. And from the initial hands-on with it (not particularly impressive or robust, especially compared to earlier concepts), I suppose it's not a surprise.
That's to add a bunch of other bonkers downtrends, e.g. smaller battery than the P3 for the non-XL version, no more unlimited storage for original quality photos... also, still only offering 64 or 128gb of storage for a flagship in two thousand and nineteen is utterly hilarious. Yeah, I know that doesn't matter for probably most people, and Google's whole thing is to store everything online (see the original photos quality caveat above, though), but come the fuck on.
faaaaaaarp
on soli specifically, a couple of the first hands on things I've read/watched said that it's not some super magical thing. Granted, early impressions, but I wonder if it wasn't really talked up a whole bunch because it's not actually really a big thing?
Yeah, initial on hands impressions I'm hearing is that that it's not particuarly precise (definitely not the sub-millimeter precision they were talking up before), you have to do large, awkward movements for it to register, and the experience is just on the whole clunky. And, I'm thinking even if it was, the software will probably take a while to catch up anyway.
So Google did its launch announcement of the Pixel 4, while im not a fan of the Pixel series for a multitude of reasons I can appreciate them usually being best in class for photography.
When the 4 was shown off I seriously thought it was a bad joke.
Was it just because its just a fancy camera and nothing really else compared to other phones in the same price point in the market, or something specific?
I think wunderbar answered most of my points about my issues with the Pixel phones. This new model though feels like both an over engineered nightmare with its Radar stuff. But also horribly poor value when compared to the competition in the market right now.
The P4 series in particular have made some horrible feature cuts against the previous models. Stuff that was either a great USP or something that's near standardised in every other phone has been missing or removed completely.
However it's the battery that's the final nail in the coffin. Paying the price listed for such a poor battery is near criminal in 2019.
For a couple of years now I've been of the opinion that google is just another android OEM, who makes one of many implementations of android, and is not the best at making either hardware or software.
Their cameras are great, but the phones are.... not good. They've been plagued by reliability issues. the 2XL had a crap screen. the USB-C ports on the 2 and 3 series wore out, the 3 has a calling issue that was never fixed, etc. The battery life is subpar compared to other phones, especially on the smaller non XL phone. And seriously, the Pixel 4 having a 90hz refresh display and a 2800mah battery is a recipe for disaster.
On the software side, Google's android skin is clean but barebones, other OEMs do better things. Google also has a bad record for buggy version updates. They're not the only OEM to have buggy version updates, but considering they run the Android project, I would expect better. Some people like the Google skin of android, and that's great for them. I don't mind it at all either, there are just better implementations of the platform out there, in my opinion.
The only thing google does better than anyone else is software updates. Security updates are out at the beginning of every month, and version updates come day of. the only other OEM who manages that is Essential, and they don't really count.
This is 100% my own personal opinion, but as android updates have gotten more iterative and less significant from year to year, I'm becoming more and more ok waiting a couple months before a major version update gets pushed to my phone, especially if that means it's thoroughly tested. Would I like it faster, sure. Do I have to have the latest update the day it releases? It would be nice but I can live without. I've been playing with Android 10 on my Essential Phone and it's honestly not that much different than 9.
Basically, I think the only reason anyone should buy a pixel is if you absolutely have to have the best possible camera you can buy in a phone. Otherwise, there are better options, cheaper options, and better options that are also cheaper.
My catch is they have to be also Google Fi compatible. And I'm kind of skeeved out buying any of the OnePlus options or Samsung (too many bad personal experiences with their devices & don't like the curve design after seeing so many coworkers & fellow travelers with cracked screens because of the curve edge). So that lowers the options to... Essential? I think that's pretty much it...
Might just wait and see if the 4A or a Pixel 5 is better and live with the Pixel 2 another year. Battery life isn't as great as it used to be, but still gets through a day and a half if I really have to.
Yeah I was so happy with my Pixel 3 I was ready to jump to the 4 but it seems like a huge misstep for them. Like the radar controls look janky, no ultra wide camera, and the battery/storage not improving... Idk. Might wait to see if the 4a addresses any of that.
Local H Jay on
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
My only disappointment with the Pixel 4 so far is that the orange doesn't come in 128GB for some stupid reason. I'm going to preorder mine today.
Posts
It's probably down to the earbuds, more expensive ones support lower latency codecs like aptx that drastically reduce the delay. If you're playing local files VLC lets you adjust the audio delay to sync it up, and can even remember it and autoset it whenever your earbuds are connected, for streaming like netflix you're kinda SOL though
Is there any way to tell from the amazon page (https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B07MQ1FVBV/) if they support the lower latency codecs? All I see is that they are bluetooth 5 but I didn't even know that was a thing.
Steam | XBL
Earbuds at the prosumer level are in the mid hundreds.
Bluetooth earbuds under $100US are considered budget models.
It took some searching but according to the manual for those earbuds they support A2DP/HFP/HSP/AVRCP, so it looks like they do not support AptX.
I picked up some IEMs (KZ ZSTs) for £15 a while back and later added their Bluetooth module for £12. Water resistant, AptX and excellent battery life, and sound worthy of something far, far more expensive.
Granted I still use my wired buds more often (on a V30, why wouldn't you), but having the option is sometimes useful.
But yeah, I know what you mean.
Steam | XBL
it's likely the fact that the earbuds are cheap. some audio codecs are lower latency than others and the ones that are low latency tend to not be present on cheap products.
Upgraded the phone to a Nexus 6P and it's complete garbage with it. The volume control is completely out of whack (it goes Silent, Quiet, Noisy, 15 more level of Too Loud), random static burst while music is playing, it'll randomly lose connection and I need to turn the devices on in a very set order, otherwise it doesn't see the speaker until I manually search for nearby BT devices.
I keep my old Nexus 5 in the bedroom as an alarm clock, just so I can still use it to listen to music down there.
$70 CAD is definitely in the budget side of bluetooth headphones. I own two sets and both cost at least $200.
You can probably find good/decent ones in the $150 range.
As is the case with a lot of products, if you look through a list of all products in a category the cheapest ones are probably the cheapest for a reason. Will they get the job done? probably. Will they be good? Probably not. If you used those headphones just for music you'd never notice an issue.
Yes they are fine for music or podcasts. I wouldn't say these are the cheapest but definitely on the budget end. Time to decide if I want to return them or keep them.
I spent the last couple of days trying to decide on which replacement headphones to get, but it seems like everything has some downside. Either headphones don't have aptX, or they don't use USB-C (micro-USB is I guess OK, if everything else is good, but proprietary chargers are not something I'm interested in), or they're not water-resistant, or whatever.
I'm not really interested in the wire-free earbuds, AirPods-style, but I even considered just taking the leap and getting the Powerbeats Pro, since they seem to be getting a ton of positive press; unfortunately, turns out they use the Apple Lightning adapter, and that falls under non-standard proprietary adapter in my eyes.
The earbuds I use myself are Samsung Galaxy Buds, which are truly wireless and $200CAD retail. I got them on a sale for $160 a while back.
PSN:Furlion
While this is only re: Airpods, which you're not into, I can safely say that those little bastards are the least-unstable earbuds I've ever worn. It's insane, they just stay in unless poked, brushed, etc. Running, any motion, no problem at all.
So while every ear is different, you might be pleasantly surprised! I've also heard good things about some of the wireless Beats line.
Although, it does mean shorter battery life, some sacrifices in audio quality, and touch controls (rather than physical buttons), right? Which true wireless earbuds would you folks recommend?
Every headphone is different, every ear is different. Airpods either fit or they don't. I had the Samsung Gear IconX but I had to return them becuase they wouldn't stay in my ear properly, but the Galaxy buds do. A friend of mine is the exact opposite.
It just comes to fit. I don't have any that I currently use but I've always found bose earbuds fit my ears perfectly. I had a set of their noise cancelling earbuds (QC 20) that I could literally wear 24/7 and not get uncomfortable.
Personally I love the truly wireless earbuds but I don't find them 100% essential. the reason I got the Galaxy buds was because they're one of the few bluetooth headphones I could find at the time that charge via USB C (or qi). IF there had been a good set of headphones with a wire between them that had a USB-C port I might have gotten that and probably would have been just as happy.
(I'm on Android 9, Motorola Moto G6.)
Also Twitter and Paypal have the same problem, yet notifications for those apps still appear fine? They just time out connecting.
What do you have for a router?
You should skip 'em then. They're the same shape as all the other ones (post-perfectly-round) pretty much.
Any chance you're familiar with the interface enough to log in and change your DNS server? 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 are Google DNS and that might sidestep your problem.
Edit: otherwise see if someone will let you borrow a router and see if it works.
I tried disabling that and just setting up Google DNS on the router... no difference.
I don't know anyone who would be willing to lend me another router to test, sadly.
Everything worked fine with version of Android that my previous phone shipped with (I forget which now, maybe 7.1?) so I don't think it's the router? I really am baffled.
Why would notifications be getting through without the apps themselves being able to reach their requisite servers? I can tap on a Twitter notification but the Twitter app then fails to load that tweet.
Also videos/GIF's from cached tweets still play/animate, so at least part of twitter's CDN must still be reachable?
When the 4 was shown off I seriously thought it was a bad joke.
Was it just because its just a fancy camera and nothing really else compared to other phones in the same price point in the market, or something specific?
Their cameras are great, but the phones are.... not good. They've been plagued by reliability issues. the 2XL had a crap screen. the USB-C ports on the 2 and 3 series wore out, the 3 has a calling issue that was never fixed, etc. The battery life is subpar compared to other phones, especially on the smaller non XL phone. And seriously, the Pixel 4 having a 90hz refresh display and a 2800mah battery is a recipe for disaster.
On the software side, Google's android skin is clean but barebones, other OEMs do better things. Google also has a bad record for buggy version updates. They're not the only OEM to have buggy version updates, but considering they run the Android project, I would expect better. Some people like the Google skin of android, and that's great for them. I don't mind it at all either, there are just better implementations of the platform out there, in my opinion.
The only thing google does better than anyone else is software updates. Security updates are out at the beginning of every month, and version updates come day of. the only other OEM who manages that is Essential, and they don't really count.
This is 100% my own personal opinion, but as android updates have gotten more iterative and less significant from year to year, I'm becoming more and more ok waiting a couple months before a major version update gets pushed to my phone, especially if that means it's thoroughly tested. Would I like it faster, sure. Do I have to have the latest update the day it releases? It would be nice but I can live without. I've been playing with Android 10 on my Essential Phone and it's honestly not that much different than 9.
Basically, I think the only reason anyone should buy a pixel is if you absolutely have to have the best possible camera you can buy in a phone. Otherwise, there are better options, cheaper options, and better options that are also cheaper.
That's to add a bunch of other bonkers downtrends, e.g. smaller battery than the P3 for the non-XL version, no more unlimited storage for original quality photos... also, still only offering 64 or 128gb of storage for a flagship in two thousand and nineteen is utterly hilarious. Yeah, I know that doesn't matter for probably most people, and Google's whole thing is to store everything online (see the original photos quality caveat above, though), but come the fuck on.
faaaaaaarp
on soli specifically, a couple of the first hands on things I've read/watched said that it's not some super magical thing. Granted, early impressions, but I wonder if it wasn't really talked up a whole bunch because it's not actually really a big thing?
Yeah, initial on hands impressions I'm hearing is that that it's not particuarly precise (definitely not the sub-millimeter precision they were talking up before), you have to do large, awkward movements for it to register, and the experience is just on the whole clunky. And, I'm thinking even if it was, the software will probably take a while to catch up anyway.
I think wunderbar answered most of my points about my issues with the Pixel phones. This new model though feels like both an over engineered nightmare with its Radar stuff. But also horribly poor value when compared to the competition in the market right now.
The P4 series in particular have made some horrible feature cuts against the previous models. Stuff that was either a great USP or something that's near standardised in every other phone has been missing or removed completely.
However it's the battery that's the final nail in the coffin. Paying the price listed for such a poor battery is near criminal in 2019.
My catch is they have to be also Google Fi compatible. And I'm kind of skeeved out buying any of the OnePlus options or Samsung (too many bad personal experiences with their devices & don't like the curve design after seeing so many coworkers & fellow travelers with cracked screens because of the curve edge). So that lowers the options to... Essential? I think that's pretty much it...
Might just wait and see if the 4A or a Pixel 5 is better and live with the Pixel 2 another year. Battery life isn't as great as it used to be, but still gets through a day and a half if I really have to.
Looks like it's out of stock for the orange 128gb, at least on the google play store.
And on second thought, if the 4A is capped at 64gb only storage like the 3A, that's not a viable option either. Feh.